Can we be Pentecostal and Emergent?
The question of the relationship between Pentecostalism and the Emerging Church seems to be gaining some traction. This is interesting to me as one who remembers the days when Mark Miller and I tried to meet with all the AG folk at an early Soularize event. The meeting turned out to be just the two of us.
That was almost 5 years ago now. Searching the EmChurch literature, boards, and blogs pretty extensively, I find references to the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement are present, but infrequent and tangential in the main.
There could be several reasons for this, including (I’m going to make a lot of generalizations here, so just hold your nose for a moment):
1. Origins: Early and influential EmChurch authors, webbers, and speakers were almost all from outside the P/C movement. Many were Reformed. Lots of the EmChurch plants were actually SBC under the hood, including significant amounts of low profile capital investment.
2. Comfort: Attending EmChurch events for Pentecostals was never comfortable. Ask someone who was around in the early days (or even today at times) about the discomfort that our presence created for others. They did not seem to know what to do with us.
3. Reductionism: A patronizing reductionism typified some of the early conversation about us in the EmChurch sector. For example, have you ever heard this reasoning?: “postmoderns like experience, pentecostals like experience, therefore, pentecostals will do well among postmoderns.” Part of me wants to respond, “Gee, isn’t root canal an experience, too?” But sarcasm cannot conceal the lack of P/C presence among emerging culture populations. Apparently experience alone is not enough, or we’re not having enough experience, or both.
4. Stereotypes: Some stereotyping has marginalized us. A number of messages I’ve read on the boards basically equate “pentecostal” with “fundamentalist” the nemesis of the EmChurch. If only there were not so many examples of that stereotype being true.
5. Demographics: The burgeoning edge of the P/C movement is among southern hemisphere believers who fit neither the Anglo, male, suburban, twentysomething mold of the EmChurch rank and file, nor the professorial, author/speaker, boomer mode of its early leadership (it’s getting younger).
6. No show: Pentecostals tend to be doers, while a lot of EmChurch influencers tend to be thinkers (this is my patronizing reductionism—sorry). Result: we simply didn’t show up for work when the EmChurch was gaining momentum, largely loosing our opportunity to have a voice in the dialogue. For example, I got a speaking gig at the Emergent/National Pastors Convention meeting in ‘05 because a friend complained to one of the organizers that there were no Pent/Char voices at the event (with a couple exceptions, Todd Hunter being one. Todd is an exception to everything I’m saying here, as are some others). The workshop I presented on Postmodern Pentecostals was attended by about 10 people, but God bless the organizers for including me.
7. Writing: A parallel issue is that Pentecostals, valuing a culture or oral expression, are sometimes ambivalent about education, and tend not to write books very often (with the exception of the megachurch pastor/self-published variety), while the EmChurch highly values theological training and lives for the next influential book on theology, culture, or the Church. Pentecost is a movement of preachers. EmChurch is a movement of writers. You speak at a Pentecostal conference because you can preach. You speak at an EmChurch conference because you can publish.
8. Reactivity: The EmChurch is largely reactive, especially to the megachurch boom of the 80’s and 90’s. Lots of the key influencers were and are refugees from the megas, especially from staff pastor roles. Pentecostals involved in EmChurch, early on in particular, also tended to be “ex” or “post,” i.e., people who felt alienated from the movement (and we have more than enough sins to make this happen) seeking out an alternative view of Christianity free from what they perceive as Pentecostal baggage. Some of this luggage is doctrinal (e.g., our distinctives) some of it is personal (e.g., the dozens of youth camp horror stories I have heard), some of it is experimental (i.e., they got tired of being told what to believe and do, and are looking to explore the faith with greater freedom). Ironically, early Pentecostals would have made some of these same claims about leaving (or being thrown out) of the mainstream churches many of them left to join the movement.
9. Age: Key Pentecostal influencers tend to be in their 50’s and 60’s (look at any of the “talking head” posters for our conferences), while key EmChurch influencers are getting younger and younger, with important books be written by 20 and 30-something authors. Most Pent/Char speakers/writers simply miss the generational window that audiences and publishers now require. [Stanley Grenz was an exception. Stan described himself to me once as a “closet Charismatic.” He was such a blessing to the Church. I miss him.]
10. Color: The growing edge of the P/C movement is among people of color. EmChurch is largely Anglo, but doing better on this issue. The P/C movement at least espouses openness to women in ministry (although we have huge progress that still needs to be made), while many in EmChurch circles (remember, Reformed and SBC under the hood) are ambivalent at best on this. Here again, though, I feel the EmChurch is doing better.
Check it out: A couple of people have written recently on some of these issues. Check out Bryan Thompson’s article on theOOZE, “On Being Pentecostal in the Emerging Church” http://www.theooze.com/articles/article.cfm?id=1229
Bryan is an AG guy working as a young adult pastor at a UMC church here in Springfield.
Also see the blog by Dorcas George commenting on Bryan’s article:
http://pastoretteponderings.blogspot.com/
Dorcas is a pastor in Wisconsin who likes Braveheart and Bach.
[If you have seen anything else out there lately, please post it below.]
Now that I’ve laid out these inflated generalizations, let me put them on a diet:
1. Generalizations are the enemy: It’s hard to have a conversation without them, but they are misleading. I’ve been asked questions like, “is the EmChurch good or bad?” “Well,” I might reply, “is Pentecostalism good or bad?” The only answer with any integrity is, “yes.” Most of the pastors and members of EmChurch venues that I’ve met have no resemblance to the “young liberals” stereotype that my more conservative friends tend to fear so much. Remember, most of these friends are reacting to the sins (real and perceived) of the mainstream evangelical church. Some of them will end up in the liberal camp, but I think most will not. And some have few theological interests, as in the mainstream, they are present within EnChurch because of their cultural prefernces.
2. Definitions are puzzling: If the response to my position is that those not gravitating toward universalism, communitarianism, and voting Democratic are not truly Emergent, then we have reduced our conversation to a debate over definitions. Now that’s really important in one sense, but too often turns into a straw person argument in which I define the EmChurch (or Pentecostals) in a specific way, and then critique that, regardless of its representativeness.
3. Sociologists wanted: We need to think of the EmChurch sociologically, not just spiritually. Could it have happened without the mega movement, without the internet, without youth culture, without North American affluence, etc. How does it compare to other American religious movements? I hope my friend Adam Long will respond here. I would love to hear his impressions.
4. One movement/many sectors?: So perhaps we need to think of the EmChurch as having “sectors” or “neighborhoods” or degrees of “emergence” or “valences” or something. Laying the whole thing out on a conservative to liberal, one-dimensional scale feels primitive, but perhaps it is a small beginning. Several people have suggested typologies. I have one in Off-Road Disciplines. Ed Stetzer has a great one at: http://www.crosswalk.com/faith/pastors/1372534.html
5. It’s the Church: The EmChurch has problems because it is the Church after all, and the Church is often a mess. If you don’t believe this, read just a couple Pauline epistles (say, the letters to the Corinthians) and tell me I’m wrong. This sector is no better nor worse than any other. Pentecostalism has so many painful issues that we hardly have the rocks to throw at anyone else.
6. It’s a love thing: Refusing to love part of the Church is simply not an option we have, whether the object of our scorn be Pentecost of EmChurch. That does not mean that I accept everything that every EmChurch player believes, but then I don’t accept everything that every flavor of Pentecostalism holds to, either. In any event, James tells us that “we all make many mistakes,” so we need to tread lightly when tempted to feel superior enough to start lobbing accusations. If critique is in order, then fine, but it needs to be specific, biblical, even-handed, and expressed from a soft heart. Correction is to be gentle. Otherwise, most of what the world believes about us becomes true.
7. Rookie mistakes: Most of the people I read blasting the EmChurch have almost never actually met anyone who is a part of it. Some have attended a conference or church service and then written a “shock and awe” article in reaction, but these folk tend to come from such a conservative baseline that I suspect they would write the same article if they attended a red state Pentecostal service. I’m not going to peg my response to that of commentators who find a coffee break during Sunday morning to be scandalous.
8. Lost tribes: Pentecostals blew it early on by not engaging the EmChurch movement. Currently, we are not doing well among our own young leaders, so perhaps this is no surprise. Historically, we took the same posture toward the Charismatic renewal, waiting for it to go away, cautioning people about it, and then embracing it, too late, when some of it’s participants sought out our churches. Some Classical Pentecostals are loathe to admit that our revival needs reviving (especially in our Anglo churches), or that the Spirit may be moving in some new way somewhere else (exactly the claim we made when our revival broke out 100 years ago). We need to get into the game. The result could be revitalizing our own future, or at least giving our young leaders an alternative to being postPentecostals.
My impressions here are based on 6 years of traveling among non-traditional churches and leaders, knowing some of the famous ones, but drinking coffee from coast to coast with hundreds of others whose names you wouldn’t recognize, and a couple years of interview research among young pentecostal leaders.
Since mentioning the EmChurch tends to be incendiary, let me leave no room for assumptions: I am painfully orthodox doctrinally, with a Pentecostal identity that is a matter of choice, not of inheritance. I feel unthreatened by having friends who see things differently.
In my experience, young Pentecostal leaders are looking for credible models of the future and for anyone else who is searching for them. I’m trying to connect them to each other so a critical mass can form.
Add your comment.
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
Earl Creps—a popular speaker and leader—is director of the Doctor of Ministry program and associate professor at the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary (AGTS) in Springfield, Missouri. He has been a pastor, ministries consultant, and university professor. Along the way, Creps earned a Ph.D. in communication at Northwestern University and a doctor of ministry degree in leadership at AGTS.
What is Earl doing? View or subscribe to Earl Creps' Google calendar. Or learn how to contact him directly.
Earl, I believe the answer to your question is NO. I have been involved in the conversation for some time and my conclusion is that the EC/EM cherry pick Scriptures to contradict fundamental truths about salvation. I will not be too extensive here but if you do some research you will find they fall perfectly into the description of 2 Peter 2. I hope you do not feel pulled in that direction.
Earl,
Fantastic analysis. I am an A/G youth pastor in Birmingham, Al. I struggle with all the issues mentioned above as far as my relationships. I enjoy meeting all kinds of people and their flavor of faith does not scare me. Neither my faith or the truth of the Gospel is so fragile that it cannot be handled with rough hands. Thanks for the reflections. I also enjoyed hearing you speak at the A/G Youth Conference this fall. If you are ever in Birmingham, Al. stop by and I’ll buy you a cup of coffee.
Paul Turner
I was reading about the Emerging Church, Brian McLaren and Earl Creps. I have not found anything in writing from the Emerging Church condoning the gay lifestyle but the fact that Brian McLaren came to Sherwood AR and spoke at The Open Door Community Church, Sherwood AR, (which is where I live), speaks volumes to me. This is an openly ‘gay and married’ pastor and his partner. Just thought I’d practice being a ‘watcher on the wall’. Shelivs4JC
Earl,
as an AG YP, I have found most of my theological inspiration, and quite frankly, hope that things can change for the better, from writers who could be categorized as emergent. Honestly, I am saddened but not surprised at how critical Pentecostals can be towards many newer spiritual movements in the church given that only 80 years ago (and as recently as 20 years ago in some cases) we were ourselves the object of much scorn from other churches. With that said, there is a growing, and I would venture to guess, significant segment of our younger church goers who simply have seen through what seems to have become the Pentecostal form, but essentially lacks the power we claim we are supposed to have. I’d rather not just walk away from something because it’s broken. That is what emergent leaders seem to be encouraging. . . change where you are instead of migrating to where you feel more comfortable. But on the other hand, to use Rob Bell’s metaphor, I’d rather be inviting other people to jump on a trampoline that allows us to get closer to God than defending a theological wall.
Earl,
I think you’ve described the situation well. Ironically, with an emphasis on the ability of the holy spirit to do life changing things for people, p/c christians seem to be able to offer an edge to missional activity that maybe other models don’t – thinking of someone like Jackie Pullinger.
Rob
p.s. do you talk to jamie smith much?
People make a lot of blanket statements about what it means to be Pentecostal. Frankly, I’m not real sure the PC in general knows who it is at the moment so it would be awfully difficult to answer this question. Theorietically, we know that we’re supposed to be believing and doing A LOT in terms of the charismata and all the cool apostolic stuff. We’ve read the slick reports about missionary zeal and what the Lord has done abroad. . . now the American church is trying to bring itself to some kind of understand in who we are.
Then Emergent rears its head and really poses some problems w/ all our Pentecostal stereotypes. We find the HS breaking out in contemplation, in solitude, at the coffee shop, by the check out counter. . . and we’re pretty slow to say this SPirit stuff is Pentecostal. We need a redefining of church and what it means to be Pentecostal in this generation. THis is not a lowering of the bar experientially or easing back prophetically. . . its simply a huge perspective shift that most are uncomfortable with.
I’m an A/G Senior Pastor in NY and I have to say Earl Creps is nothing more than a false teacher. But many of you progressive (wolves in sheep’s clothing) emergent church leaders leading the blind wouldn’t know that since, none of you have a very good foundation in sound doctrine. Oh goodness sound the alarm (sirens, bells, and whistler going off) yes I said sound doctrine and that is what the emergent movement does not have on its side.
The entire emergent system is the New World Order-One world Anti-Christ religious system that was prophecies in 2Ti 4:4, “And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” And other places.
Earl Creeps should have his credentials removed and he should be thrown out of our A/G seminary as of yesterday. That goes for all the apostates in the A/G who agree with him from the top down. Please do spare me the “New Age semantically attacks” I have heard it all. Stop following the anti-Christ system and get back to the book and stop denying the power thereof with your satanic (emergent) form of godlessness.
Thanks for this article. It spoke to much that I’ve been pondering. I’m completely open to whatever God wants to do individually and in my church to help people who do not know Christ to enter into a relationship with Him. I hope we can lead them to embrace everything He wants to reveal to them and everything He wants do in their lives, including experiences we call supernatural (they are perfectly natural to God I expect). At the A/G church I attend we’ve been reevaluating everything. We are struggling with how our particular church should look in 2007 since we have about 30 people and nobody’s been saved in this church for years.
Several factors seem to come up in trying to mesh pentecostal and emerging approaches – or any other approach for that matter. Something I’ve observed of many people 45-50 and over (I’m 48) who have grown up in A/G churches (I didn’t) is a sense of protectiveness toward preserving what they call the “Pentecostal distinctive”. Many fear that manifestations like tongues & interpretation, healings, prophecy, words of wisdom and knowledge in corporate worship will be discouraged should the church embrace an emerging approach. Some older people who have been raised A/G also seem to feel that they or their parents paid a certain price for being Pentecostal, often with socio-economic and status effects. Having endured prejudice both inside and outside Christendom, some see embracing some of the 21st century trends as selling out the Holy Spirit and their church heritage. Additionally some seek baptism in the Holy Spirit as an end experience rather than an equipping experience that ultimately points back to Christ, His person and His work. I suspect that the parameters as to what manifestations of the Holy Spirit look like vary among pentecostals, charismatics and mystics. Sincere hearts and reasonable minds can disagree on how this should look, even based on biblical descriptions and certainly based on personal accounts throughout the history of the church.
I’m wondering if the purpose of the Holy Spirit to empower both individuals and the church to fulfill the great Commission is not being overlooked both by those who seek to preserve the “Pentecostal distinctive” and, perhaps also, by those who might choose to ignore Christ’s entreaty to his followers to wait to be empowered in Jerusalem before emerging. I don’t know if it’s possible to become an emerging, purpose-driven, pentecostal, missional, multi-cultural, ancient-future, culturally relevant church but I’m willing to take the journey and have the conversation if it brings people in my community to Christ.
Hi Earl,
Would you mind posting or directing me to your definition of “fundamental”? I know you state in your book that you are “painfully orthodox” in your theology, so that would seem to put you at odds with the EC as there is quite the dog’s breakfast of orthodoxy and blatant heretical teaching within that movement.
The Musings of a 40 Something, A/G Pastor in North Carolina:
The Holy Spirit demonstrating the Power and Love of Jesus through His followers fits “hand in glove” with the Emergent Church’s Biblical, trans-generational message of bringing the presence, experience, and ongoing narrative of Jesus Christ to 21C culture.
This is what Pentecost is all about. Modern day Pentacostalism must be reduced to Jesus and the Church being the visible representatives of His Love in the earth. As the religious fluff is shaken away, I believe that the Pentecostal church will look more Emergent and the Emergent church will be more Pentecostal. I also believe that there will be less emphasis on “name tags” as we continue to move into the centrality of Jesus!
As you recommend, I checked out Bryan Thompson’s article on theOOZE.
It illustrates his inter-spiritual, emergent, synchronistic approach to spirituality which places experience over Scripture (e.g., God in everyone and everything—even those who don’t believe in God). I’ve reviewed theOOZE website and find it presents the same synchronistic approach to truth expressed by Bryan.
By referring me to theOOZE, are you promoting the views presented there? If so, even though we may both be part of the AOG, you are certainly endorsing a different gospel. And as a member of the Northern California/Nevada District, I hope Bryan’s views (such as those on centering prayer) are not reflected in your ministry in Berkeley,
Thanks for your thoughts, Earl. You are one of the few people out there who see the tension that is growing in the young Pentecostals. As a young minister who would describe myself as emergent, I am having a huge battle as whether or not to renew my ministerial license with my Pentecostal demonination (Assemblies of God).
I grew up in the A/G pentecostal circles, attending every camp and event. I was profoundly moved by the presence of God and would have to say I experienced the absolute best of the pentecostal movement, with very little of its potential and real downfalls. Therefore, when I felt called into ministry I attended an A/G college. From there, I became an A/G licensed minister and got hired as an A/G staff pastor (although in reverse order: hired first, then graduated, then licensed). I served in the church for 5 years.
Somewhere along the way, I got somewhat disenfranchised with the whole Pentecostal movement. Maybe it was the amazing lack of multicultural awareness in the denomination. Maybe it was the incredible ecumenical ministry I work with and the exciting Lutherans and Baptists and everything else I have gotten to know. Maybe it was the advanced study I’ve been getting at (non-Pentecostal) seminary that has shown me the lack of biblical support for some of the doctrines.
Now, I am faced with the decision: do I renew my credentials in a movement that I am rooted to, but have a lot of conflicts with, or do I simply move out into the emergent scene, carrying only a remnant of my “Pentecostal distinctiveness?” I am praying (yes, even in tongues) and waiting for some discernment on this decision. Dialog and discussion with other on the intersection of emergent and pentecostal is extremely helpful.
Earl,
Thanks for being an early adopter among late adopters in the AG. I have a hunch that there are many disaffected young ministers who are postmodern by nature and AG by tribe. I believe that Emergent can serve as a powerful reforming influence within our tribe.
Let me plug a renewed interest in the EM/Pentecostal conversation, for anybody who’s interested in getting their hands dirty:
http://agmergent.wordpress.com
Earl,
Love it, love you. As a young pastor living in the tension and trying to advance God’s Kingdom in the midst of a crazy world, you articulate issues in my heart wonderfully. I am ordained with the A/G, but I am definitely able to have my own tradition enriched by those who could be called “emerge-whatever.”
I have served in two churches that struggled to address the spiritual needs of the next generation. The church I am with now “gets it,” but they are not a part of the denomination I am slow to give up on. Thanks for being a smart guy with his finger on the pulse of what God is up to right now, not just what He did 50 years ago.
It saddens me to watch Pentecostals turn to the emergent movement for answers on how to engage our culture. We once turned to the God of Israel but now we turn to the world. We once turned to God in prayer but now we turn to professional church growth gurus. We once turned to the gospel to set men free from sin but now we either ignore sin or turn to psychology rather than Scripture.
May God send another move of His Spirit that tears down our walls of humanism and false worship.
Emergent is out of the mind of man, not God’s. This due to the lack of anointing or manifest presence of God. The lack of God presence is due to lukewarm Christianity. Spirit filled or Pentecostal children of God are given discernment through the Holy Spirit that emergent is the forerunner to the apostate church. This is the reason why Pentecostals resist emergent.
Doc,
You hit the nail right on the head for me . . . postPentecostal. While I love the traditions of the P/C church, I feel that we have gone from a “God and others” focus to a “me” focus. I love the A/G distinctiveness but I am beginning to feel that ministers are making the whole “Holy Spirit” experience about receiving tongues and not about reaching others. In addition to that, some P/C ministers are not even preaching about the Holy Spirit anymore, as if he is someone or something to be afraid of. I don’t know doc . . . the more I stay in the P/C church, the more I don’t know how to handle all this stuff. When I read about the EmChurch movement though, I feel like there is hope for reaching the younger generations. I wish I had answers. I guess I’ll just keep asking questions!
Hey, here’s a new book idea . . . Can We Be Pentecostal and Emergent, the book by Earl Creps! I’d buy it!
LOL :)
To Earl Creps
Jud 1:3 Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.
Jud 1:4 For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. KJV
Jud 1:3 Dear friends, I’ve dropped everything to write you about this life of salvation that we have in common. I have to write insisting—begging!—that you fight with everything you have in you for this faith entrusted to us as a gift to guard and cherish. Msg.
I was on staff of a large AG church in Fl. for over 15 years and we did not change the Gospel message in any way. Many came to Christ every week. Stick to the message of Jesus and the people will come.
Also I was on the staff of another ministry for almost 13 years that reach around the world. Again the simple message of God’s love was taught and thousands came to Christ. We do not need to change our message to reach the world. Just tell them that God loves them and has a wonderful plan for their life.
I’m sure this will fall on deaf ears but you must give the answer to God for your life. As a brother I will pray for you. Preach the Word of God it has all the answers.
Earl,
i found your post from Tall Skinny Kiwi. i am a part of emergent village and the emerging church. i come from a conservative, charismatic, fundamentalist, evangelical background, which i am no longer affiliated with. i consider myself post-evangelical, like the Thomlison book of the same title. AND, i am a Queer Christ-follower. i have felt ostracized by many in the charismatic/pentecostal culture. Case in point from poster #3 above who said, “I was reading about the Emerging Church, Brian McLaren and Earl Creps. I have not found anything in writing from the Emerging Church condoning the gay lifestyle but the fact that Brian McLaren came to Sherwood AR and spoke at The Open Door Community Church, Sherwood AR, (which is where I live), speaks volumes to me. This is an openly ‘gay and married’ pastor and his partner. Just thought I’d practice being a ‘watcher on the wall’.” i am friends with Brian McLaren and he is one of the most Christ-like persons i have ever met. This kind of talk is divisive and not helpful to any conversation regarding God and faith. There are bigger fish to fry in the world than attacking us in the LGBT community. We are not lepers and are usually very nice.
Thank you for your very balanced and kind-hearted thoughts in your post. i think you came across intelligently and loving.
Some of your commenters here scare me and i do not wish to get into unwinnable arguments. i have learned not to check my brain at the door and not accept everything i hear or receive in an email as the right answer. i read alot and research alot. i am not a literalist when reading and interpreting the Bible. I look at the Bible in historical and cultural contexts written by human beings.
i do not have all the answers and i hold things loosely. i value the questions more than the answers. i value love and kindness over meanness, hatred, and being right about everything.
You have a beautiful heart even though i am sure we disagree on many things.
God bless you.
Warmly,
Adele
Earl some very interesting thoughts on the tensions between Emerging and Pentecostal/Charismatic.I am 53 years of age and was brought up in an evangelical,charismatic,restoration type fellowship.After 15 years of this I left becoming disillusioned with Christian power struggles etc and some of the more Fundamentalist beliefs.After 16 years of staying away from Christians I came back to faith through an experience that I would describe as an epithany.I soon noticed a new kid on the block – Emerging movement – I do their blogs and read the books and even talk to some of their leading gurus.You are correct the new preacher is the author!Nothing wrong with being an author but one can be lured into the publishing houses agenda and you are a product to be sold.Let’s face it most authors have one good book in them and then repeat the message in all their others.Many have little or no theological training so to make them gurus is a bit dodgy.I have noticed that Penal Substitution is not one of Emerging’s favourite doctrines hence the criticism from your conservative commentaters! I am no fan of it myself but just wonder if Emerging movement is not primarily a reactionary movement to the fixed doctrine and excessive authority structures within Fundamentalism,including Pentecostalism.I describe myself as a charismatic who doesn’t believe in Penal Substitution but my fellow Irish believers just look at me totally confused.Emergent is needed but let’s not make it the be all and end all!!!
Here is what i posted at Tall Skinny Kiwi:
i love the emerging church and believe we are in a postmodern era. As stated above, i am a formal charismatic, semi-penetcostal, who has left that tribe way behind because of all the weirdness and fundamentalism i experienced. Not that all charismatic and pentecostals are that way, for the record.
Yet, sometimes within emerging church circles, there comes a cross an intellectual elitism at times. i like to call it INTELLECTUAL MASTURBATION! It bugs me sometimes. i am not stupid, and i enjoy deep conversations, but not everyone knows, understands, or is familiar with big theological and philosophical terms. Thus, those in the emerging church segment of the population can risk being exclusive instead of inclusive, which is one of their tenets.
Thus, where i think charismatics/pentecostals can find trouble fitting in with emerging church folks. At least from my OWN PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, we basically were expected to leave our thinking and inquisitive minds at the church door, listen to the teachings of the pastor as gospel, cuz he can hear rightly from GOD, and only read Christian books affirming his teachings. Rigorous outside research and scholarship was to be thrown out, including reading anything secular like philosophers who might be atheists. They had no place. i could not take this and i left. So, i was drawn to emerging church folks but at times feel ostracized as well. But, i feel more at home here in this tribe than anywhere else for now. No entity or person(s) is/are perfect. Continuing dialogue is good and NEEDED.
Ok, i’ve rambled on long enough!
Warmly,
Adele
Existential Punk has hit ona problem within Emerging – the intellectual m*********** !!Most believers do not think at all but sometimes we hit overload with certain emergent thinkers – is it all the Emperor’s New Clothes and just another way to feed the ego?
Dear Existential Punk,
Bless you, I have a question, when you say you are a Queer Christ Follower please explain that to me. I have not come across that expression before.
Thanks
Tim
Tim Wrigt, commen 23:
i am a lesbian who identifies as queer, which is a term of self-empowerment. It is a unifying sociopolitical umbrella term for people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, transsexual, intersexual, genderqueer, or of any other non-heterosexual sexuality, sexual anatomy, or gender identity. i like it better than lesbian, maybe b/c of my youngish age.
I am a Christ-follower, as in one who is becoming a Christian, in that i am always in process with Christ. i am never fully complete in this life. i don’t have all the answers nor do i claim to have everything nailed down. i am a Christian but am continually in need of evangelism in my life. i hold my hands up to God, hold things loosely, as a fallible human, not able to ascertain the full absolute truth of God.
If you read Pete Rollins book, “How (Not) To Speak Of God” he talks about this.
i hope this helps!
EP
I am a Foursquare senior pastor, and the untenability of a marriage between the p/c and EmC has been tying me up in knots. I’m beginning to think that the foundation of the EmC lies more in what it is NOT, than what it is.
I think it’s similar to this last presidential election. Barack Obama got elected for what he isn’t (Bush) much more than what he is.
And here’s where the friction (to me) lies. How can a p/c deal with someone who is emergent, if the very reason they’re emergent, is to be unlike them? Invariably, the conversation tends towards them attempting to list a profuse number of points as to why they’re not p/c.
But often, every point they make begins with “I think” or “I feel” and when asked for a scripture reference, they neither have one, nor feel they need one. More to the point, they resent me for leaning on what I’ve heard described to me more than once, as a “crutch”. By that, they mean the Bible!
I want to love and embrace. If I’m the old wine skin that needs to be thrown out, so the new wine can be poured, so be it. Even Moses had to stay up on Nebo, that last time.
God help us all.
IF we don’t get back to the basics of the Gospel, and remember that the bible is to be taken literally, God’s word, we will all fall into a pit and perish.
No wonder people can and do live lifestyles that are unholy and unnatural.
Because we don’t believe what God has said and reduced it down to someone’s ideas put on paper taking away any absolutes that should ancor our souls.
Are there any AG pastors out there left that want to unite and seperate ourselves from an apostate church….?
Well call it the reformed AG.
“Short on friends, short on books, no praise and worship bands (add your own etc.): What was the secret of Paul’s victory?”- R.W.
How can there be AG/PC who deny the power of the Word of God?
I am thinking Leonard Ravenhill spoke the most clearly in “A Man of God” (video) found on Sermonindex.net